Built Ford Tough

I don't know for sure either way, but from what I have read, it sounds like you aren't able to do this. Teams aren't going to be allowed to trade for a player and then cut them using the amnesty clause right away. I may be wrong as I don't even know if anybody really knows the exact details of the clause, but from wht I have read it doesn't sound like this is going to be allowed.

I'd rather have him guard the bigger centers than Noah who can get pushed around a bit by some of the bigger players in the league. With Shaq and Yao calling it quits, there isn't a center in the league who can match up physically with Howard anymore while there are plenty that can give Noah some troubles physically. It would also be more beneficial to have him guard the weaker offensive player, which is more often than not the center, so that you can make better use of his brilliant help defense. Noah can match up really well with 90% of the power forwards in the league and in the cases where you really need to lock a guy up, throw Howard on him. I can understand the thinking behind having Howard guard power forwards, but I'd probably rather have him guarding the opposing 5, enabling him to be more help conscious.

Frattin to the Marlies and Joey Crabb called up. I wish it was Kadri, obviously, but you can't say that Crabb didn't deserve the call up as he has been one of the best players in the AHL this season so far. I also am pretty excited to see how a Frattin/Colborne/Kadri line does in the minors. I don't expect to see Crabb up for very long, though. Either Armstrong will get back in the lineup and he will be sent down, or his play will be underwhelming enough that they will bring up Kadri again.

So November starts and the Canucks look like they are going to get a 5-0 win over the Flames. I don't understand what it is with this team but they just can't seem to win in October and once November rolls around, they can't seem to lose.

I think his injuries were a huge factor in his passiveness, though. His thumb injuries really messed with his ability to hit jumpers or create anything for himself and because of his poor play, it really seemed to mess with his confidence. Miller has shown in the past that he is much better than he showed last season. A confident and healthy Miller doesn't pass up open jumpers or second guess himself on the floor. As for the 2nd point, well, yeah, if you have a choice between Chandler or Nene and Miller, obviously you take the two bigs. They are both better players than him and fill a more pressing need. However, I highly doubt that the Heat are able to nab one of them for the MLE considering Nene seems to want a big pay day and I highly doubt that Cuban would let Chandler go to Miami, even if it meant overpaying him. If cutting Miller opened up more space than the MLE, then I would seriously consider it. I'm not exactly sure of their cap situation, but I figured that they wouldn't be able to use anything more than the MLE even if they let go of Miller.

I don't know. The thought of pairing Howard and Noah on the defensive end is something that I would be very hard pressed to pass up. With pick and roll being such a promminent part of a large majority of teams' offensive repertoire, the Bulls defense would be nearly impossible to score against considering how adept Howard and Noah are at defending pick and rolls. I also don't think Noah would have any problems playing the 4. Maybe on offense things might get a bit crowded in the paint as he isn't able to step outside the paint like Gibson can, but I wouldn't be too concerned with his ability to play the 4. He has the frame for it and is certainly athletic enough to play it. Add in Deng as the defensive stopper on the wings, who just so happens to be one of the best wing defenders in the league, and it is a defensive frontcourt that is just absolutely drool worthy. I'd try to move Gibson for a middle of the road shooting guard (not a star, but an equally talented one as Gibosn is at the 4) and rolling with a lineup like that before dealing Noah. I just couldn't resist the possiblity of pairing that kind of godly defensive frontcourt. At the very least, I would give it a try before trying to deal Noah. Either way, though, it would be scary. Whether they keep Noah or deal him for a 20 point scorer at the shooting guard spot, it the Bulls would be a very dangerous team.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates So, umm, is it even worth attempting to explain why the Wizards should use the clause on Lewis? Not likely. However, it is worth discussing just exactly what cutting him means. Do you think that by getting rid of him and creating a surplus of cap space the Wizards could actually make a splash in free agency? It is highly unlikely that a stud like Howard or Williams or Paul are going to sign in Washington, but they could find some really valuable pieces to pair with Wall, their 2012 draft pick and some high potential players such as Vesely and McGee. Do you realistically believe that shedding Lewis' cap hit could be the final piece in the Wizards playoff puzzle?

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates I don't really think cutting Okur would be a wise move. I know he is a shell of his former self and can't really contribute much, but keeping him around for the last year of his contract to ease Kanter's transition to the NBA seems more beneficial to me than eliminating his cap hit from the books., especially since the Jazz are looking like they are going to rebuild. His veteran presence and ability to mentor the young bigs like Kanter and Favors are definitely worth keeping around if you ask me. If his contract was for multiple years, it would be different. I think the same can apply to Bell as well. You want to have some solid veteran leadership around to help out the young players. The Jazz are one team who I see the amnesty clause not really doing much for.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates I wouldn't use the clause on Kleiza, at least until he is given a shot to prove what he can do in healthy, because his contract really isn't that bad. It is a declining contract so the worst parts of the deal will have already passed by the time he even suits up for the Raptors again. Should his knee injuries prove to keep him out of the lineup permanently, it would wind up being a complete waste of the amnesty clause to use it on Kleiza as I'm sure a large portion of the contract would be covered by insurance. As for Calderon, I'm undecided. If the Raptors had any sort of reliable point guard I would immediately be all for giving him the boot, but with only Jerryd Bayless, who has proven to be more of a combo guard than point guard, on the roster his floor game may be needed, especially with such a young team around him. O n the other hand, he is due to make over $20M to play like a 2nd string point guard and he has gotten worse each of the past 3 seasons. His contract is definitely a turn off. Ultimately, I don't think I would use it on Calderon simply because of the flexibility that the Raptors currently have, even with him on the books. With no big name free agents likely to come to Toronto, there really isn't a need to create as much cap space as possible, so you might as well just ride out the duration of his contract, or save the clause for later should it prove more beneficial to use.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates It really comes down to the luxury tax for San Antonio if you ask me. The Spurs aren't going to keep him around at that price tag if it puts them deep into the luxury tax, especially if he continues the lack of production he has given them since joining the team. However, if the luxury tax is more forgiving than anticipated, I'd be surprised if the Spurs let him go as they will undoubtedly want to make at least another push with Duncan. Even with his struggles in a Spurs uniform, they don't have many alternatives at the small forward position and will just have to hope that he can give them enough to help Duncan get his 5th ring.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates Not much to say to this as it is 100% correct. The Kings can't afford to use an amnesty cut on a player, despite how much they may want to.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates This is definitely the most interesting situation, like mentioned. It must be hard to simply sever ties with a player who has given so much to a franchise but looking at is rationally, the only logical decision is to use the clause on him. It was well known prior to the draft that he had serious knee issues and his knees have only gotten worse after enduring the grind of an NBA season since 2006. He is never going to be the player he once was and will be paid like a superstar despite his play being less than half of what is expected of a star. It is definitely going to suck having to simply let a player like Roy go considering his history with the franchise, but at the end of the day, it is a decision that needs to be made for the betterment of the franchise.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates Even if the Suns follow through with waiving Carter, which will undoubtedly happen, I would still cut Childress. He is simply now worth the contract he was given last year and provides absolutely nothing to the Suns. I realize he and Babby have a history together but if you are given an opportunity to shed $34M worth of what is basically dead weight, you have to do it. Unlike many other potential amnesty cut candidates, Childress doesn't even provide much on the cout to warrant at least thinking of keeping him around. It would be a huge mistake not cutting him, at least as far as I am concerned.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates Brand may have shown enough last season to convince the new ownership group that he is worth keeping around but he isn't going to get any better and is just going to be paid more as he game continues to deteriorate. The Sixers have two nice young building blocks in Turner and Holiday so it could be a good idea to cut ties with Brand, try to move Iguodala and then start over to allow the new ownership gruop to put their stamp on the team. Would you seriously entertain the thought of cutting Brand? Or do you think that he is worth keeping around, even at the hefty price tag?

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates The Arenas gamble certainly didn't pay off but at the same time, is cutting him really the answer? They are still going to be in a terrible position financially so its not like getting his cap hit off of the books will clear up space that Smith can use to go out and sign an impact player in free agency. They also don't have any valuable trade assets to work with that would entice a team to part with a legitimate player. So if you really think about it, the Magic's best (only) hope may be that Arenas can become an impact player once again because they certainly don't have the ability to go outside of the organization to convince Howard to stay. It may be in their best interest to hold off of cutting Arenas and hoping that he reverts back to his old form. Its not like cutting him is going to suddenly open up ample opportunities for the team.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates Like said here, with the excellent mangaement of the Thunder, they really have no need to use their amnesty cut on anybody. Even if they can't deal Robinson to anybody, I doubt they would have a problem with him just sitting on the bench and inserting him into the game whenever they need an energy boost or something.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates Pretty much as everybody would expect. The Knicks will cut any non important player that will result in them having the best chance of landing Chris Paul, Dwight Howard or Deron Williams in an effort to create their own big three. Even though Balkman doesn't make much I don't see him sticking around and eating up any of the valuable cap space needed to sign a marquee free agent.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates The only player contract wise that makes sense is probably Okafor, but even then, I still wouldn't cut him. He isn't worth the money he is being paid but he is hardly a liability on the floor and with New Orleans potentially losing both West and Landry to free agency, the Hornets can't afford to lose another solid big man. People may bring up Ariza, but he is still a good player, just being forced to assume a larger role than he is capable of. He may be a tad overpaid, but if he is able to play the defensive specialist, spot up shooter and athletic finisher role that he is suited for, he has proven in the past that he is capable of being a very good role player on a contending team.

Speaking of risky moves, how awesome would it be if the Bulls cut Boozer, managed to pawn of Brewer on somebody and then signed Dwight Howard using the cap space they created? I don't know for sure, but I do think it is plausible under the cap, although not very realistic. Still, could you imagine a lineup of: Howard Noah Deng Korver Rose ??? If the Bulls had the balls to even try something like this, and it worked out, it would quite possibly be the greatest move in the history of the NBA. That is just a pipe dream, though. I'd be absolutely shocked if the Bulls actually cut Boozer.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates No real explaination needed here. The Outlaw signing was a head scratcher when it was made, and he did nothing to silence the critics during the 2010-11 season. Get rid of him and hope you can strike it big in 2012.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates The only one I can really see is Darko, but Kahn isn't going to cut him after all of the praise and accolades he has given him over the past couple of years. If they want to get rid of Ridnour, they won't have to cut him as I am sure that they will be able to find a handful of teams who would be interested in acquiring a veteran backup point guard like Ridnour.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates Even though Udrih is clearly the 2nd best point guard on the roster (perhaps even better than Jennings in some aspects) it does make sense to cut him as the Bucks have two other competent backups at the point (as well as having Jackson at the 2) but are very thin up front. Strictly in terms of talent he doesn't deserve to get cut but I can understand why the Bucks would let him go, if they so choose to.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates If he is healthy and you can count on him staying healthy, there is absolutely no way that I would use the amnesty cut on Miller as I said it before and I'll say it again, his skillset is a near perfect compliment to James, Wade and Bosh. However, he has had troubles staying healthy throughout his career and with such limited assets at their disposal, the Heat may not be able to afford to have Miller miss 20 games every season and bounce in and out of the lineup. Cutting him and clearing up his cap hit may be the only way that they will be able to round out their roster and surround the big three with the necessary supporting cast to win it all. It is, in my opinion, one of the more interesting dilemmas when talking about a team using an amnesty clause.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates Mike Conley is the only player on the roster that I can at least understand the idea of using the amnesty cut on, but his contract is not nearly bad enough to break up a core that showed a lot of promise last season. He may overpaid a bit, but not nearly enough for me to simply let him go without getting anything in return for him. The Grizzlies should be, and seem to be, more concerned about adding salary in the form of a Marc Gasol extention rthar than cutting costs.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates Obviously Walton would be the number one choice of the Lakers to use their amnesty clause on. If he does end up retiring because of his back issues, it does bring up an interesting dilemma with their resident idiot formerly known as Ron Artest. Assuming the harsher luxury tax penalties are enforced, would that be enough for Buss to let him go to save some money? He can still be an effective player, but he clearly isn't the same force that he once was and last season was a fairly large disappointment. Would you be in favor of the Lakers letting go Mr. Peace or do you believe he is still a key cog in their championship aspirations?